Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Attorney General v. Manufacturer's Mutual Fire Insurance

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1886PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Quo Warranto. (1) A corporation organized under the present law's for insuring against loss by fire, upon the mutual plan, cannot lawfully issue policies of insurance of the character and number complained of in the information. A mutual company has certain well-defined features and limitations, and its nature and characteristics, as distinguished from other companies, has been judicially considered.

Read the full summary

Quo Warranto. (1) A corporation organized under the present law's for insuring against loss by fire, upon the mutual plan, cannot lawfully issue policies of insurance of the character and number complained of in the information. A mutual company has certain well-defined features and limitations, and its nature and characteristics, as distinguished from other companies, has been judicially considered. The principle lying at the foundation of such companies is their mutuality; neither in their organization i or practice is any direct profit contemplated or realized. Insurance Co. ». Boeclder,…

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

This case stands upon a demurrer to an information filed by the Attorney General for a writ of quo warranto. The object sought by the writ is to require the respondent to show cause why it should not be dissolved for using the franchise of a stock insurance company, it being only a mutual insurance company. The respondent was incorporated in December, 1884, under article 3, chapter 119, Revised Statutes, 1879, as a mutual fire and marine insurance company.

The information, in substance, states that the respondent has issued a great number of policies known as stock policies, that is to say,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mygatt v. . New York Protection Insurance CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1860

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hill v. BakerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  2. Dewey v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Keystone Auto. Club Casualty Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1939
  4. Carr v. Union Mutual Fire InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
  5. House v. SiegleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API